17
   

During The American Revolutionary War, the state religion of Great Britain was Christianity?

 
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2014 08:54 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:


Again, Contrex acted scholarly and to be himself. This wise man's calm explanation cogently anatomised an extemporaneous remark, which was actually well-thought-out and entered into his subconscious. That is why he would speak it out in an off-the-cuff manner. He's not joking here, because both (the situations in US and UK) are serious realities.


Once the meaning is clarified, let's turn to Izzy, who's one of the central figures in the debate, who's backed by so many people here and whose enthusiasm in defending Christianity is apparent and vehement (unlike Setanta, the weak atheist, in order to guard Christianity, attacked me under the camouflage of atheism by concentrating his fire on denouncing Jefferson).

As soon as the questions about Izzy are cleared, we'll be able to discuss further. For example, to explain Contrex's question "how to explain the intervening massive peak in religiosity during the Victorian era and later?"

First, let us ask Izzy this question:

Are you for or against Christianity?

Based on the impression we all share, the answer seems no doubt to be a strong "for". Is it so, Izzy? Now allow me venture further to point out that Izzy is a Christian (or a strong supporter of Christianity). Yes, Izzy?

It could have well explained Izzy's passion in the discussion: A firm denial of the decline of Christianity in Great Britain.

Next, let us ask Izzy another question:

Has your passion really helped defend Christianity?

I believe Izzy's intuition would immediately urge him to answer a loud "Yes". But in his deep heart, he hesitates.

Why hesitate?

Today, the majority of American people are Christian. This means Christianity has won a great victory in spreading its Gospel in the United States. Any Christian should be proud of the triumph of the religion. Yet Izzy failed to get this (and insisted it was joking):

izzythepush wrote:

Ori wrote:
Contrex sincerely pointed out that while most of Americans believe Christianity, there is no state religion in America. Can you feel the sincerity of his judgment?

No, I honestly can't.


That is, Izzy did not go to help defend Christianity; rather, he actually derided it and destroyed it. That is why he hesitates.

It is not because Izzy is so retarded, but because his mental inertia has led him astray: If Ori said something that was wrong in his ears, anything Ori says will be wrong in his mind. In other words, Izzy does not focus on the facts or the ideas; he focuses on the person and acts ad hominem.

That is why seeking truth is important. That is why I said Contrex is a wise man. Because he speaks truth. The truth that majority of Americans believe Christianity is the grand victory of the religion itself, and it has greatly helped defend Christianity.

Izzy should remember: False positive wastes time, while false negative is probably life-threatening. To admit the actual decline of Christianity in Great Britain is not a fault. Rather, it will awaken sincere Christians work harder to improve their religious work there.

I do not agree with you, but I will defend your right in Freedom of Religion.

Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2014 09:10 am
@oristarA,
You can do with and in your thread whatever you want, oristarA.

But it is quite interesting that the topic changed from bashing Set over insulting others (called by you "his followers") to praising the wisdom of David and contrex, critisation of my knowledge in foreign languages, followed now by the question about izzy's religious beliefs to ... Shocked
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2014 09:19 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
Today, the majority of American people are Christian.
According to the latest statistical data, the majority of citizens in England and Wales are Christians.
Quote:

http://i1334.photobucket.com/albums/w641/Walter_Hinteler/a_zpsa83b2137.jpg

Quote:
Key points
Despite falling numbers Christianity remains the largest religion in England and Wales in 2011. Muslims are the next biggest religious group and have grown in the last decade. Meanwhile the proportion of the population who reported they have no religion has now reached a quarter of the population.
In the 2011 Census, Christianity was the largest religion, with 33.2 million people (59.3 per cent of the population). The second largest religious group were Muslims with 2.7 million people (4.8 per cent of the population).

14.1 million people, around a quarter of the population in England and Wales, reported they have no religion in 2011.

The religion question was the only voluntary question on the 2011 census and 7.2 per cent of people did not answer the question.

Source: Office for National Statistics

And I want to add what has been remarked here already by many posters before:
there is no state religion in England (or Great Britain or the UK).
izzythepush
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2014 09:57 am
@oristarA,
What a weird bunch of questions that tell us a lot about your state of mind. I don't know what you think has been debated here, but I suspect it's very different from what anyone else would say.

Ok, I'll give it a go.

Quote:
Are you for or against Christianity?


No.


Psycho ward 13 wrote:
It could have well explained Izzy's passion in the discussion: A firm denial of the decline of Christianity in Great Britain.


I've not felt at all passionate during this debate, I've felt exasperated because of the patent nonsense you've been spouting. I have not denied the decline of Christianity in Britain. I've denied that the decline of Christianity has anything to do with Thomas Jefferson and the American Revolution which is the ridiculous point you keep banging about with no evidence whatsoever. I have explained it as being linked to scientific rationalism, Charles Darwin and the like. I said that the English were never that religious anyway and referenced Shakespeare and Chaucer to support my point. I then said that if one were to look at any period in history that could be linked to a decline it would be the Interregnum, not the American Revolution.

Quote:
Has your passion really helped defend Christianity?


I don't know. What passion? I've not been defending Christianity but accuracy. You said there were no Christians in Britain. I've provided statistical evidence that proved well over 50% of the population class themselves as Christian. Now I'm not saying they're all tub thumpers, but we've still got quite a few of them. The local bingo hall has closed down and become an evangelical church, they're giving out free tea and biscuits every day and trying to get you to talk about the Bible. Now you can't tell me those people are Christian in name only.

I don't need reality wrote:
I believe Izzy's intuition would immediately urge him to answer a loud "Yes". But in his deep heart, he hesitates

Why hesitate?


This is all going on in your head. I'm not there to hesitate.

Even more barking wrote:
That is, Izzy did not go to help defend Christianity; rather, he actually derided it and destroyed it.


So let's just get this right. Insisting that Thomas Jefferson caused the decline in Christianity in 21st Century Britain isn't mad enough for you? You now want to claim I destroyed Christianity? People have accused me of all sorts of things, but I must admit, that's a first.

Your maniacal ravings have finally become entertaining. I think you're my favourite loony on A2K. Keep it up.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2014 10:05 am
Here is a question i asked Oristar quite some time ago:

Quote:
What mechanism do you allege that he [i.e., Thomas Jefferson] employed--how was he to accomplish this end?


He has not answered this question.
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:11 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

http://i1334.photobucket.com/albums/w641/Walter_Hinteler/a_zpsa83b2137.jpg
And I want to add what has been remarked here already by many posters before:
there is no state religion in England (or Great Britain or the UK).


The Tearfund Survey in 2007 found that only 7% of the population considered themselves as practising Christians

The Church of England is the state religion in England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England

I don't know why you wanted to pretend you're more knowledgeable than Contrex (Contrex: "while in the United Kingdom, where a major division (England) has an official State religion")? He's a Briton.
izzythepush
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:16 am
@oristarA,
7% of the population is still a lot more than zero. In the UK we have an established church, (the C of E,) bishops sit in the House of Lords, and vicars have pastoral responsibility for everyone in their parish regardless of faith. That is not the same as a state religion where everyone is forced to be of that faith.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:19 am
@izzythepush,
What a dodger. How sly it is! Yet your tricks will fool no one.

You entered this thread by criticising my using Contrex's remark as the "only source" and claiming that you understood Contrex very well and I don't. Now you dodged, pretending that you've said nothing like that. To be frank, I held my breath as I watched how you arbituarily asserted his remark to be only joking as if you were very him - you have trodden on one of the most cherished American values - the supreme worth of the individual.

A person like David who's professionally trained in the law would be aghast by your totalitarian manner. You actually acted with the usurped (or stolen?) authority to speak for Contrex though you denied it. Because your ass decided your brain, not vise versa, in the action. You could fool no one. Your behavior is much like a red guard armed by Maoism during the Cultural Revolution. Look at you, I wondering whether I'm looking at a commie, who's not grown up in the free world, rather, grown up in a totalitarian regime and got totally brainwashed.

That is, your psychology tends to get personal, rather than to get truth.

You care about how many people agree with you, careless about what the truth is. Mao would be proud of you when he hears your crying "nobody agrees with him, nobody". Because mao got the largest amount of people to support his idea, yet he turned out to be the one whom professor Frank Dikotter names as the greatest mm in human history ( http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/maos-great-leap-forward-kill ).
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:20 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
The Church of England is the state religion in England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England


From your above quoted source:
Quote:
The Church of England is the officially established Christian church[3][4][5] in England

Where does it say something about "state religion" ??????????????
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:27 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
I don't know why you wanted to pretend you're more knowledgeable than Contrex (Contrex: "while in the United Kingdom, where a major division (England) has an official State religion")? He's a Briton.
Please give the link where contrex said so as in your quote.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:28 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:

The Tearfund Survey in 2007 found that only 7% of the population considered themselves as practising Christians
No. The research report from Tearfund was on church attendance.
Besides that,we certainly can discuss what practising a Christian religion means. The various Christian churches have different "rules" about church-going as well ....
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:34 am
@oristarA,
What have I dodged? You clearly don't understand Contrex, otherwise you wouldn't have taken an off the cuff remark so seriously. You claimed that nobody in the UK believed in the doctrines of Christianity and now you've posted a source that says 7% go to church regularly.

You have posted absolutely nothing to back up your ridiculous claim that the decline in Christianity in Britain is directly related to the American Revolution and Thomas Jefferson in particular. Setanta has now asked you twice to say what method Jefferson used to make that happen, (although for the life of me I can't see why Jefferson would want Christianity to decline in Britain but not in America where he was living.) You dodged Setanta's question. Now answer it. That should be good for a laugh if nothing else.

David can talk for himself, but it would be interesting to hear what parts of my posts are "totalitarian."

That's something else you can answer, what have I said that's totalitarian?

If anyone is totalitarian it's you, you insist we believe something just because you say so. You refuse to offer any evidence whatsoever to back up your ridiculous idea, and start insulting people who refuse to take your word alone as proof.
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:43 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

oristarA wrote:
I don't know why you wanted to pretend you're more knowledgeable than Contrex (Contrex: "while in the United Kingdom, where a major division (England) has an official State religion")? He's a Briton.
Please give the link where contrex said so as in your quote.


http://able2know.org/topic/250269-10#post-5739238
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 07:55 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:


You have posted absolutely nothing to back up your ridiculous claim that the decline in Christianity in Britain is directly related to the American Revolution and Thomas Jefferson in particular. Setanta has now asked you twice to say what method Jefferson used to make that happen, (although for the life of me I can't see why Jefferson would want Christianity to decline in Britain but not in America where he was living.) You dodged Setanta's question. Now answer it. That should be good for a laugh if nothing else.



I've said I will analyse one by one, not do it once for all.
And only take leisure time to do it. No dodge here.
izzythepush
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 08:08 am
@oristarA,
Putting something on the back burner will always be seen as a dodge until it comes off.

What about my totalitarian attitude, what have I said that's totalitarian?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 08:09 am
@oristarA,
Well, I really have to do what you said
oristarA wrote:
I suggest that you better go to improve your English.


Many will have to join me, including the Royals for instance:
The official website of The British Monarchy wrote:
The Church of England, and the monarch's relation to it, was established through a series of Parliamentary Acts in the 1530s, which brought about the English Reformation.

Henry VIII broke from the Roman Catholic Church by denying papal claims to ecclesiastical or any other jurisdiction, and by declaring himself rather than the Pope as Supreme Head of the Church in England.
Source
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2014 08:10 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
I've said I will analyse one by one, not do it once for all.
Native use as I have known it
and used it thru out America is:
"once and for all" meaning: done once and for all time
(i.e., with no need of further repetition).


oristarA wrote:
And only take leisure time to do it. No dodge here.
I suggest turning your period after "once for all" into a comma,
and continuing with a lower case a, thereby avoiding the awkwardness
of starting a new sentence with a conjunction, thus turning it into a sentence FRAGMENT.

I recommend being logical. For the most part,
grammar supports competent logic.





David
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 03:57 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Here is a question i asked Oristar quite some time ago:

Quote:
What mechanism do you allege that he [i.e., Thomas Jefferson] employed--how was he to accomplish this end?


He has not answered this question.


Before the demystification of the mechanism gets started, why not think something first?
As common sense: Ideas lead to actions that work to acoomplish the end.
So please tell me, Setanta, that on what basis Jefferson proclaimed his idea"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man"?
You've claimed that you know Jefferson, which gives you some nerve to show your disapproval of him.
Did Jefferson say this mindlessly?


oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 03:58 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

oristarA wrote:
I've said I will analyse one by one, not do it once for all.
Native use as I have known it
and used it thru out America is:
"once and for all" meaning: done once and for all time
(i.e., with no need of further repetition).


oristarA wrote:
And only take leisure time to do it. No dodge here.
I suggest turning your period after "once for all" into a comma,
and continuing with a lower case a, thereby avoiding the awkwardness
of starting a new sentence with a conjunction, thus turning it into a sentence FRAGMENT.

I recommend being logical. For the most part,
grammar supports competent logic.


David


Thank you Dave.

0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 04:01 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Well, I really have to do what you said
oristarA wrote:
I suggest that you better go to improve your English.


Many will have to join me, including the Royals for instance:
The official website of The British Monarchy wrote:
The Church of England, and the monarch's relation to it, was established through a series of Parliamentary Acts in the 1530s, which brought about the English Reformation.

Henry VIII broke from the Roman Catholic Church by denying papal claims to ecclesiastical or any other jurisdiction, and by declaring himself rather than the Pope as Supreme Head of the Church in England.

Source


That is perfect English in my view. What's wrong in your eyes, WH?
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 03:38:10